tv TSA and Homeland Security Nominees Testify at Confirmation Hearing CSPAN July 11, 2017 2:14pm-3:45pm EDT
to drive. we show that we are able, we are capable of driving our own life and being in the driver's seat to follow our own destiny by doing this act of civil disowe benals. > -- disobedience. >> the senate homeland security committee this morning held a confirmation hearing for the president's nominee to be the next t.s.a. administrator and homeland security undersecretary for intelligence and analysis. wisconsin senator ron johnson chairs the 90-minute hearing. mr. johnson: this meet something called to order. pursuant to notice, the committee meets to consideration of nominations of claire and grady to be the secretary of management and henry concerner to be the special council, office of special council.
mr. johnson: we are meeting to consider the undersecretary for intelligence and analysis for the u.s. department of homeland security. and admiral to be assistant secretary of transportation administration, t.s.a., u.s. department of homeland security. these are two incredibly important positions, particularly at this point in time, with all the threats we face to our transportation sector. as well as across the globe and the threats to our homeland. so the secretary -- the undersecretary for intelligence analysis, the department of homeland security, is responsible for leading the department of homeland security's office of intelligence and analysis. and also serves as the department's chief intelligence officer. in these roles the
undersecretary is responsible for the streemings of intelligence and analysis, to develop a common operational understanding of threats to the homeland, and sharing relevant information within d.h.s. and among state, local and private sector partners. as the department's chief intelligence officer, the undersecretary's also responsible for overseeing intelligence across d.h.s. and collaborating with intelligence community partners. multiple reviews of the office of intelligence and analysis by this committee, watchdog organizations and others have raised concerns about the intelligence, the lack of coordination of important intelligence communities and the low morale and human resources challenges facing the office. the next undersecretary has an opportunity to strengthen the department's intelligence program and therefore help secretary kelly secure the ation.
the administrator's job is to assess intelligence and threats to the transportation sector and direct the approximately 53,000 employees in protecting hundreds of millions of travelers each and every year. the t.s.a. was created after september 11 attacks to disrupt future terrorist plots and safeguard the nation's transportation system. the agency oversees aviation security as well as rail, highway, mass transit and pipeline security with an overall budget of over $7 billion. aviation remains a target for terrorists. to achieve its mission, the t.s.a. needs to continually improve its screening capabilities and strive to adapt to the terrorist threats of the future. the next administrator has the opportunity to increase the t.s.a.'s screening capabilities, improve work force morale, and deliver effective and cost-efficient security to the traveling public. with that i'll turn it over to ranking member mccaskill. ms. castor: thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate you holding this
hear -- ms. mccaskill: thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate you holding this hearing. i'm pleased to be here today, given the strong qualifications and distinguished careers of the nominees that in front of us today. you have both had exemplary public service careers and we need individuals like you leading our homeland security and intelligence agencies. you both have difficult jobs ahead of you. the offices you seek to lead are essential ones for the protection of our homeland. t.s.a. has the visible role of protecting air travel, as well as the less well known job of securing ground, rail and maritime security. and the office of intelligence and analysis is a component of the intelligence community that informs the work of all the agencies and is charged for sharing intelligence with local, state and tribal governments. in addition to the challenges you'll face in executing the mission of these organizations, you'll face a serious challenge given the current morale of the work force in these offices. both t.s.a. and i.n.a. are seen by their employees as being
among the worst places to work in the federal government. according to a surfay of federal agencies, i.n.a. is anked 304th out of 305 federal agencies subcomponents in morale. t.s.a. is doing slightly better ranked at 300 out of 305. strong leadership will be necessary to strengthen the work force at these offices and ensure that these components are recruiting and retaining the most qualified talent. with threats to our transportation system on the rise, t.s.a. has an essential role in preblingting -- in protecting our homeland. i've made clear several times my concerns about the president's proposed cuts to the t.s.a. budget, particularly when it comes to funds for counterterrorism programs. i expect to you make clear to the administration at the highest levels what you need to do your job and you should not back down until the
administration proposes a budget that works for you. i expect to you make sure your office becomes apolitical. this administration can be making policy decisions based on intelligence and facts. it is your office that has the data and analytic tools to make sure that the policy decisions are sound. i look forward to working with in the future. i understand you told the committee staff this week that you would come in to sit down with them once you've been on the job for several months. i really appreciate that in the. i understand you offer and i expect my staff will take you up on it. i hope both of you will remain responsible to this committee once you are confirmed. thank you, mr. chairman. mr. johnson: the committee wants to welcome the witnesses, your families. want to thank you for your past service, your willingness to serve again. also want to thank your families for their sacrifice. because these are big, important jobs and you're going
to be busy and away from home. it's certainly going to be a family sacrifice as well. i know in your opening statements you'll introduce your family members and friends and supporters during your comments. it is the tradition of this committee to swear in witnesses so if you'll both rise and raise your right hand. do you swear the testimony will you give before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god? be seated. our first nominee is mr. david glaway. he has experience in national ecurity and law enforcement. there glawe has previously served as an f.b.i. agent and started his career in public service as a houston police officer. mr. glawe has a certificate from the john f. kennedy school
of government at harvard university and ambassador of arts degree from the university of northern iowa. there demra way in this role i think your extensive background in law enforcement across the spectrum from local, state and federal, is just going to serve you well. it's crucial. so, again, we appreciate your and look s to serve forward to your testimony. mr. glawe: chairman johnson, ranking member mccaskill, members of the committee, thank you and look forward to for the opportunity before you today as the president's nomify for the undersecretary of intelligence and analysis at the department of homeland security. i'm honored to have been nominated for this position by president trump and i'm humbled to receive the support of secretary kelly, deputy secretary duke, and director of national intelligence coates. before we begin, i'd like to take a moment to recognize my family. i'm grateful for their support and sacrifices to allow me this opportunity, with us today is the bedrock of my life, my 20-year husband and husband, perry. a supervisory special agent at the f.b.i.'s washington field olves. foremost in our mind are our two wonderful children, alexis
and wyatt. i want to thank the rest of my family and friends and co-workers who have supported me throughout my life. i would not have this opportunity without them. the mission statement of d.h.s. is clear and direct. with honor, integrity, we'll safeguard the american people, our homeland and our values. d.h.s. faces a complex and evolving threat environment and must work across the federal government and in concert with our state, local, tribal, territorial and private sector partners. as the only member of the u.s. intelligence community, charged with statutorily sharing intelligence and information with our state, local, tribal and private sector partners, i.n.a. enables d.h.s. to execute this mission. secretary kelly's guidance is clear. he expect it's i.n.a. to fight timely, useful and operationally relevant intelligence to the our igence community and state and local partners. i have over 2024 years of law enforcement and intelligence service and i'll work to apply that knowledge i acquired and the lessons learned to make i.n.a. a premier our state and intelligence organization that drives operations and intelligence integration, information sharing and delivery of unique analysis to operators and
decision makers that enable them to identify vulnerabilities, position resources and ultimately mitigate threats. i.n.a. has one of the broadest customer bases in the intelligence community and meeting the many and varied demands of those customers is a challenge. i intend to focus i.n.a.'s analytic capacity on areas where they're positioned to add value, areas like trade, travel, cyber, borders, marine, and aviation security. rather than duplicating work done elsewhere. i.n.a.'s greatest strength without question is its people. if confirmed it will be my honor to lead the professionals t i.n.a. and making i.n.a. a diverse and productive vinche for the work force. in closing, i'd like to take a moment to recognize the important role of congress. congress plays in the success of i.n.a. if confirmed, i pledge to enable the committee to fill that role by keeping you informed on i.n.a. activities and developments. i'm committed to transparency and look forward to partnering with you to move the organization forward and best protect the homeland.
mr. chairman, i'll stop there and submit the remainder of my comments for the record. thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today and look forward to answering your questions. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. glawe. our next nominee is vice admiral. he was vice admiral and chief operating officer of the u.s. coast guard when he retired in 2010 after 32 years of service and again we thank you for that service. prior to becoming vice admiral, he was the commander for the pacific area defense forces, protecting 73 million square miles of territory throughout the pacific region. after retiring from the coast guard, vice admiral was group president for the national security group at a&t solutionses and vice president for national programs at pacific architecture and engineering. his extensive experience in the homeland security field from his time in the coast guard and the private sector covering crisis management, strategic operations, finance and risk management and counterterrorism. he received the -- his bachelor's degree from the u.s. coast guard academy and holds two master's degrees, one from
columbia university in economics, and one from the massachusetts institute of technology in business management. vice admiral, i have to say, reading your opening statement, which you'll be presenting here, your extensive experience -- i can't think of something sb more qualified at this point in time to lead such an important agency. i look forward to your testimony. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and good morning, chairman johnson, ranking member mccaskill, and distinguished members of this committee. it's a privilege to appear before you today as the president's nominee to lead the transportation and security dministration. i look forward to working with the entire team at the department of homeland security. i have always before hed from the strong sfor of my family -- always benefited from the strong support of my family. my children and many members of our family are watching from locations around the country. i thank them for the love and
support and am glad they're able to be present today. in person and virtually. for this important event in my professional life. let me begin by recognizing the men and women of the transportation security administration. each eanched one contributes to the security of our nation's transportation system and works tirelessly to earn the trust and respect of the american people. mr. pekoske: their work is critical to the security of our avingsation and surface transportation systems and they have in my opinion, done an outstanding job in protecting us from an ever-present and very dynamic threat. it would be my privilege to join them as their administrator and bring my leadership skills and experience directly to the effort of securing our homeland. t.s.a. could not accomplish its mission were it not for the strong partnerships it has with other federal partners, state and local public safety and law enforcement agencies, the airline industry, the government services industry, airport and surface transportation system owners and operators, and international partners. throughout my professional career, i've seen firsthand the importance and enormous value
of strong partnerships and professional relationships. this is the extended t.s.a. team tanned would be my privilege to join them as well in our collective goal of ensuring transportation security in the united states. hit high honor of serving our country in the ute life. i am forever grateful to my coast guard colleagues for their investment in my leadership and professional development. my career in the coast guard provided me with the background and experience that are very relevant to the position of t.s.a. administrator. specifically i performed in top leadership positions of a large operating agency, with a security in law enforcement mission in the department of homeland security. i have experience in operational risk management and risk mitigation, and i have experience working with other federal, state and local law enforcement and public safety agencies, industry and interest groups, and international partners and international standards setting bodies. i jind very successful midmarket company in the government services industry. my experience in the private sector was very valuable and learn how'd government can be a
better consumer -- learned how government can be a better consumer. today as you know we face a multitude of threats that are persistent and ever-evombinging. we know certain terrorist organizations remain focused on commercial aviation and disrupting the freedoms we joy as an open society. staying ahead of these threats and ensuring appropriate measure are in place to ensure security effectiveness will continue to be the t.s.a. -- t.s.a.'s most significant challenge. my overarching goal would be to lead t.s.a. to an ever stronger position as an effective and efficient provider of security for our transportation systems, especially aviation, with a strong and growing level of public confidence in the agency's mission performance. i will articulate a clear vision for t.s.a., to ensure all of our efforts contribute to its achievement. my full intention is to service t.s.a. -- serve as t.s.a. administrator if confirmed for as long as the president and secretary wish for me to remain
in this position. i think continuity is very important. if confirmed i would be the 13th administrator in 16 years. when you include those in an acting capacity. i'm always reminded of a quote of alexander hamilton when he as our first secretary of the treasury issued instructions to the commandering officers of the revenue cutter service which is the predecessor to the coast guard. he issued these instructions in 1791, approximately 226 years ago today. he said in part, they will always keep in mind that their countrymen are free men. and as such are impatient of everything that bears the least mark of a dom nearing spirit. they will -- of a domineering spirit. i think this saged guide france one of our country's founding fathers -- guidance from one of our country's founding fathers is something that will guide me if i'm so fortunate to have the opportunity to lead t.s.a. t.s.a. is the face of the federal government, to millions of air travelers every day. these travelers rightfully
expect effective and efficient screening with a minimum of delay by government officials who treat them with respect. i will work diligently with the entire t.s.a. work force to ensure t.s.a. continues to meet this standard. we must balance the demands of security with the imperatives of liberty guaranteed in our constitution. in closing, i thank president trump and secretary kelly for their confidence in my ability to lead t.s.a. chairmanbers of this committee, i thank you for your courtesies during this confirmation process and for the opportunity to appear before you today. i look forward to answering your questions. mr. johnson: thank you, vice admiral. there are three questions the committee asks of every nominee for the record. i'll ask the question, each one of you can answer them separately. first, is there anything you are aware of in your background that might present a conflict of interest to the duties of the office to which you have been nominated? mr. glawe: no. mr. pekoske: no. mr. johnson: do you know anything that would prevent from you honorably discharging
the responsibilities of the office to which you've been nominated? mr. glawe: no. mr. pekoske: no. mr. johnson: do you agree without reservation to comply with any request or summons to appear and testify before any duly cons constituted committee of congress if you are confirmed? mr. glawe: yes. mr. pekoske: yes, sir, i do. mr. johnson: i want to thank the committee members for showing up in attendance. out of respect for your time, i'll hold off on my question and turn it over to senator mccaskill. ms. mccaskill: i will do the same. i'll be happy to defer to my colleagues' questions and question at end like you, mr. chairman. mr. johnson: then it will be senator portman. mr. portman: thank you. that i the chair and running backing member for their allowing -- ranking member for allowing us to go because we have crazy schedules. i appreciate the way they conduct the business of this committee. thank you for you serving. i appreciate the fact that you both have extensive experience in the -- on the intelligence side and in your case, admiral, you had extensive experience on the security side.
i was struck by one thing you said. that is that there have been 13 people in your position of supervising the t.s.a. operations in 16 years. you said you hope to be able to stick around for a while. this is one of my concerns at d.h.s., honestly. we have the oversight responsibility for this gar gantt one agency that i think was necessary. we needed to have a better response after 9/11, bringing together 23 departments and agency. but we move people around a lot in that agent. i'm concerned about the impact that has on morale, on readiness in terms of your responsibilities. i know you're not going to be able to say as much as you can tell us once you are confirmed. but could you for a second talk about that? are you concerned about the amount of churning, the amount of changes in positions? i know sometimes within the federal government system, the advantageous for an individual to change positions in order to increase compensation.
and what can we do to address that? if you could talk about that for a second. strictly as it relates to t.s.a. mr. pekoske: when secretary kelly asked me if i would consider the t.s.a. position, one of the things that was important to me is that whatever i agreed to do in the future, that i did it not just for a very short period of time. i committed to him and committed today at this hearing that i will serve as long as i'm able to serve in that position. i think leadership cons newt in an agency like t.s.a. -- continuity in an agency like t.s.a. is critically important. senator mcs cass kill mentioned the morale issues with the work force. i think that's one of my key focuses should i be confirmed. to place a lot of attention onto that issue. see if we can't raise job satisfaction across the employee work force. and also reduce attrition. in both -- both will improve security effective and security efficiency. i'm committed to do that and committed to spending a lot of time with the work force. additionally, i think it's important not just the top leader be in a position for a
duration of time, but that the leads that are support that top leadership also have some level of continuity. if confirmed, i will pay attention to that very carefully. and the assignment of members inside t.s.a. mr. portman: thank you. i think that's a critical management challenge at d.h.s. thanks for your service. your background again, very impressive. starting at a police officer, working your way up to the top ranks of intelligence gathering. one of my big concerns about your department and how it operates is how the centers are getting information. i think some fusion centers work prettywoman. others not so well -- pretty well. others not so well. a constant concern i hear back home in ohio is the fact that sometimes information is not disseminated in an appropriate way. either not quickly enough or not at the level of detail of what really is effective and helpful. we do put a lot of focus and resources into fusion centers. not just at the federal government level, but state and
local governments and particularly law enforcement spent a lot of time and effort on that. can you talk to us about that challenge and how you sfwend to deal with it? i know you've been dealing with fusion centers. are they working and how can we better disseminate that information? mr. glawe: thank you for the question. if confirm i had look forward to working on the enterprise approach to fusion centers. i would just start off with your question and answering it. i was fortunate to be on the richmond joint terrorism task force with the f.b.i. when virginia started its first fusion center. so i was intimately aware of the relationship with fusion centers, with state and local law enforce ms and some of the challenges that occurred then. watching it progress over essentially the next 13, 15 years or so. the relationship with state and locals is coming from those organizations and working with them throughout my career is critical. i know with all the major chiefs and sheriffs association, the national fusion center association, and i hear a reoccurring theme. they're absolutely necessary.
but having a business enterprise approach to how they get the intelligence on a boat, disseminating intelligence to them, an officer reeskseeveking it from them is critical. there's a lot of sheriffs and chiefs out there. each operates independently. what i did get, if confirmed, to work with them in an integrated approach to come up with an enterprise that is some consistency in how we're sharing intelligence. recognizing every fusion center is different. but from a federal side and how we desimilar neat intelligence, it's going to be critical on how we have that enterprise approach. i had a commitment from all the organizations to start working on that. i look forward to working on that. mr. portman: so it means consistency, reliability, what does it mean in terms of the level of detail that you can provide? in other words, one of the plaints -- complaints i hear sometimes is that our fusion centers aren't able to get the information they find actionable. they're sometimes told after the fact, and we've been
blessed -- blessed not to have more terrorist attack bus certainly we've had some that -- attacks but certainly we've had some that could have been thwarted had we had better information flow from the federal level or international level. federal level and down to the state and local level. so talk to us about that for a minute. what -- how account business enterprise approach that you're advocating help to getting information in the right hands? mr. glawe: thank you for your question again. the tactical level intelligence that's needed by the fusion centers, so as threats are fluid and dynamic and changing, to disseminate that intelligence and to have an enterprise starting at d.h.s., i.n.a., and getting it out to the fusion centers so it's accurate, correct and timely is the critical node. as we've seen with the other intelligence organizations, merging of auto hybrid of, vetting it so important ths appropriate and correct, but getting it out quickly. it's got to be tactical. so they can adjust resources, readjust personnel.
readjust their posture in their communities, be it from terrorist networks, cyberintrusions, transnational criminal organizations, the opioid epidemic that's devastating the united states, we have to produce tactical level enterprise, timely intelligence down range. that's going to be a change of our business model. the i.n.a. employees are incredibly dedicated. they want to do this. the going to create a process to do it. accurate and timely. mr. portman: once you're confirmed, i think he will be, both of you, we look forward to working with you on that. i'm not suggesting there's a cookie cutter approach. it's different in different regions but i think more continuity regard to the fusion centers would help too. dissemination of information in a reliable way. consistent way. and ensuring that we can thwart these attacks on the homeland. thank you for your service. test test thank you, mr. chairman -- mr. tester: thank you, mr. chairman. i also want to thank you and the ranking member for your
courtesy. very much appreciate that. mr. me koskie, thanks for stopping in -- pekoske, thanks for stopping in. yesterday we talked about partnerships with other law enforcement agencies at t.s.a. utilizes. can you briefly talk about how important those partnerships are? briefly please. mr. pekoske: yes, sir. thank you for your time yesterday. i greatly enjoyed meeting. i think partnerships and i said it in my opening statements as well, partnerships are critical to the success of t.s.a.'s security mission. there's no easier way to say it. they're absolutely critical. i greatly appreciate the work that state and local law enforcement agencies, public service agencies, have provided in partnering with t.s.a. and i hope that we have been a good partner. one of the things that, if i'm confirmed, and i get the opportunity travel out to the work force, which i will make as the highest priority for me in the first couple of months, and then throughout my tenure, it is to meet with our state and local law enforcement partners and reinforce the appreciation we have for the
service they provide and the criticalness of the overall success of our mission. mr. tester: the law enforcement officer reimbursement program was zeroed out in the president's budget. that money's used to basically help local law enforcement support your mission. do you know if there's any other grants out there that could replace the grants or is that the only game town when it comes to supporting local law enforcement? mr. pekoske: i don't know if that's the only game in town to support them. if confirmed i'll take a close look at that and get back on your calendar. mr. tester: you'd agree that it's critically important that those partnerships are there and i can tell you that local government, even state government, to a certain extent, really doesn't have the resources to be able to add value to your operation. mr. pekoske: yes, sir. the partnerships are critically important. mr. tester: i want to talk about, since it was brought up during senator portman's questioning, you said that you wanted to increase job satisfaction and reduce
attrition. how much do you think that the pay for your front line folks has to do with keeping them on the job? mr. pekoske: i think it's certainly a factor. to say otherwise would i think be silly. but i have not spent enough time with the t.s.a. work force, my only time really with the t.s.a. work force has been as a passenger going through a screening line. i have read the surfay results. i pledge, if confirmed, to spend a good amount of time early on. to really understand what some of the issues are. for me, just from what i've read, some of the issues would pertain to leadership at all levels of the organization. reinforcement of the front line performance. recognizing good performance when good performance is performed. providing the work force adequate training. and for those that see a career in t.s.a., providing them the counseling and the support to pursue that career, but make the expectations realistic. mr. tester: i i would just say leadership is critically
important. it's critically important. you know that coming from your previous job. but i would also hope that, as you look at the turnover of your front line folks, that you take a look at where they're moving to and what that -- if pay is a potential problem. if we're in a mode of continually retraining folks that are on the front lines, that's not healthy for the organization. and i don't think the healthy for security either by the way. what's your perception on that? mr. pekoske: i agree. one of the things that concerns me, in addition to the job satisfaction survey sults -- results, is the attrition rate. which is, in my view, very hay for the work -- high for the work force. i have a macronumber as a nominee. what i'd like to do is look thea -- at the attrition rates across each individual airport and get a handle on that. mr. tester: i think the reassignment of people is also critically important. we're starting to see that in a lot of agencies. if they come out with a decision that maybe the higher ups don't like, the white house
in particular, they get reassigned. i think that will do more to ruin employee morale than anything. you want people that are able to make decisions and support them in that decision making. so thank you on that. as far as cybercrime and cyberinterference is concerned, which countries do you see as our biggest adversaries? mr. glawe: senator, thank you for the question. clearly the intelligence committee assessment on the russian intrusion on the cyberelections i agree with. and that raises significant vulnerability points in our critical infrastructure. in an unclassified setting, maybe i take it for the record to have a list of the classified response on the countries of risk. what i would say in this setting is that did illuminate a vulnerability from active foreign intelligence are on the s that
homeland. russia's not the only game in town is what i would say. we, being the intelligence and law enforcement and private sector community, are going to have to be cognizant of those threats. i look forward two,ing on that problem. mr. tester: i appreciate that. i don't think anybody's saying that russia is the only game in town. i want to touch base. this isn't to put anybody in conflict with anybody. we have to deal with these issues because they're real. but the president tweeted out on sunday that he and the russian president putin had discussed forming an impenetrable cybersecurity unit so election hacking and many other negative things will be guarded and safe. i'm just -- i'll give you my opinion. you want to talk about the epitome of the fox guarding the hen house, this is it. -- seay head?ay mr. glawe: if confirmed, i look forward to aggressively working
with our intelligence, our law enforcement and private sector partners to glean the intelligence and our vulnerabilities on our critical infrastructure, especially in the cyberarena. the electric thunderstorm system is one electric thunderstorm -- the electoral system is one. but there are others that are vulnerable as well. especially with the private sector. my predecessor, undersecretary taylor, worked for g.e. and he's localized his conces abt the private sector. so i look at, if confirmed, to really focus on that, and what our posture currently is and maybe where we have some business process and tactical response processes to improve where we're currently postured in the united states. mr. tester: thank you. you don't have to answer this, but one of the questions that i also would like to you answer through written or whatever is what you're each going to do to break down silos between your partners. both within the federal government, state government and local government. because i think the really critical. you guys are not allowed to make as mistake. you just can't.
i appreciate you guys. i fully intend to vote for your confirmation. i think you're two quality candidates. thank you very much. mr. johnson: senator lankford. senator lankford: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you both for allowing us to be able to move on questions as well. i want to pick up where senator tester left off here on the silo issue. you've been in law enforcement for a long time. clear lines between jurisdictions and responsibilities. there are eight people will show up and have eight different jobs and you're standing around waiting for your turn to be on your task. that is especially true when we deal with intelligence operations. most of our intelligence operations are foreign-facing. trying to be able to figure out what's happening, what's coming at us. you have a unique responsibility. about trying to see what our threats are coming at us, at our closest areas. there's also overlap. you mentioned in your written testimony that you intend to focus on analytical capabilities, on areas where we are positioned to add value or that are underserved in our
parts of the intelligence community, rather than duplicating work done elsewhere. help us understand that portion of that. where do you think you can add value first and where do you think there might be duplication that we can help? we want to help with both of those. mr. glawe: thank you for the question. thank you for meeting with me regarding the nomination. the d.h.s. enterprise is very uniquely poised. in the marine, the trade, the travel, and the border security environment, and also with the private sector and sharing information with state and locals, no one else i would argue has that type of infrastructure to collect intelligence, to identify threats from that arena. so that's where i see our -- in conversations with numerous staff and committee members, that that's a unique posture of d.h.s., where we can enhance value. where the duplication of effort -- with the duplication of effort, i think there is some room for improvement in the terrorism arena. there's a lot of organizations
that report on international terrorism and the affects on the homeland. including the f.b.i. and the d.h.s. relationship. if confirmed i look forward to working with my law enforcement intelligence partners to streamline our business processes, to make sure there's not duplication where there is, maybe we'll partner -- duplication. where there is, maybe we'll partner and move our resources to area -- other areas where there's not so much coverage. mr. lankford: we'd be very eager to help you with that as well. we have a lot of threats. we need to be able to focus our dollars on the areases where we can deal with those threats. if we're duplicating dollars, that means we're not looking at something else and we're missing out. so while i understand all the jurisdictional issues and that's they're deal and we can't talk about their deal, we need help in ongoing conversation to be able to determine, we do have overlap here and so we can deal with that overlap independent days ahead. you also focused your testimony on transnational criminal organizations. obviously there are multiple entities that are dealing with
part of it as well. state department, d.e.a., all kinds of different groups, f.b.i. obviously. where do you see your unique section dealing with that? mr. glawe: thank you for that question. i'm very passionate about transnational organizationle -- organized crime. the secretary has spoken about it as well. the threats that are on the homeland from transnational criminal organizations, by its nature, starts in a foreign space. the overwhelming amount of narcotics flowing into the united states from mexico and synthetic narcotics from china are devastating us. the deaths are compiling. i view the d.h.s. enterprise as the last line of defense at the border repelling these threats that are coming inbound. also to push t borders out. how do we create an intelligence and law enforcement enterprise and partnership with foreign countries, with the embassies, on identifying those threats and empowering our foreign partners and law enforcement
powers and intelligence organizations to mitigate these threats? it's quite apparent they're infiltrating with narcotics coming into the united states. others are cyberas well -- cyber as well. the dark web. if confirmed, it would be a great opportunity to work with the committee on those threats, have a longer discussion on if we're postured correctly and mistake see -- maybe some to teng readjustments that is could help us wage our consolidated war on transnational organized crime together. mr. lankford: i'd welcome that conversation. senator harris and i both serve on the intelligence committee, as well as serving here. this is essential for us as we're working through this. so we'll see each other often. but we also want to be able to make sure we have right entities on it. job. ve a tough you have a lot of folks that are scattered all over the nation. they deal with angry travelers every day. they deal with folks that are sick of standing in job. you have a lot of folks line an your hamilton quote is an excellent one to say, they're all free people and they want
to be treated with respect. as you're traveling after confirmation, i fully expect to be able to affirm both of your confirmations on. this but postconfirmation, we welcome you to oklahoma. there's a great team of folks that will -- there that work for t.s.a. that treat people with respect. their head is up rbling they're actually -- their head is up. they're actually engaging with people in a professional way. we welcome to you come to oklahoma and meet the folks there. i would love to say, i see that in every airport. i don't. in the aports i have the opportunity to be able to travel in, i will occasionally see folks that are in t.s.a., just the whole organization, head down, not interacting with people, everything's running slow. very different attitude. so as you're dealing with that from place to place, you have some unique responsibilities. i'm sure you have seen some of the red team testing as well. of people that are working with t.s.a. to be able to help evaluate where we have weaknesses. that is something our committee will track. we'll continue to track ment and be able to help with. some of that boils down to not only training of people but
acquisition. so my specific question for is you, how are we dealing with the acquisition issues at t.s.a.? because we have at times done multibillion-dollar acquisitions that two years later decided it was a bad idea and you're coming back to the committee to restart again. what can we do to be able to make sure the acquisition process works well while you're also working on the people and morale issue? mr. pekoske: thaur for your comments on the t.s.a. work force and for your invitation to travel to oklahoma, i would really appreciate doing that. i'll plation that as a priority if confirmed. acquisition is one of my highest priorities and i think it's also deputy secretary duke's highest priority and hopefully soon to be undersecretary for management grady's highest priority. us have worked together before. from my perspective, i would really like to see greater technology insertion in what we do in t.s.a. and getting that technology insertion to the work force faster. i think that too, for the work force, will help them do their jobs from a morale perspective.
being title of the bill use something that really is much more useful than perhaps what they're using today. and seeing the agency be response to have what they, i'm sure, have articulated as need in putting it out in the field and getting it in place. t.s.a. has an innovation task force which i've been breeched to -- briefed on. i have a lot of experience on innovation. i led the innovation effort for coast guard when i was the vice commandant. that would be a key priority of mine. mr. lankford: speed is exceptionial important. when we determine what a threat is, we can't wait four years before we distribute that out to locations. thank you. mr. johnson: senator harills. mr. harris: thank you. -- ms. harris: thank you. i'm sorry i don't see your beautiful children here today. they were a star of the show in addition to you, when you came before senator lankford and myself in our intelligence committee. i appreciate your responses to my questions for the record. for you and, mr. chairman, i would appreciate if we can submit those answers to the written record.
i appreciate you asserting that it, quote, is never appropriate to produce intelligence with the ecific intent of supporti a preconceived policy position. i also appreciate your assurance when you wrote that you would resist any attempts by the white house or anyone else to politicize d.h.s.'s intelligence analysis. on a different point, recently the supreme court partially lifted the stay on the implementation of the muslim ban. however the court said that individuals with a bona fide connection to the united states could not be subject to the ban and must be allowed to enter the united states. in implementing this, d.h.s. issued guidance defining which family relationships qualify as, quote, close family relationships. excluded, grandparents, aunts and uncles. from that definition of close family. so, my question for you is, is there a rationale for excluding grandparent and aunts and
uncles from the definition of close family relationship? mr. pekoske: i'm not aware of the rab al that went behind that. i'd have to take that back. for the record on that. i'm not aware of the criteria that was used for that policy decision. mr. harris: harris thank you. i appreciate you looking at it. i'd like you to also consider that even in our country, the definition of what a family is has changed as we move around. ms. harris: aunt and unckings in many cultures, including our own, are almost considered equal to parents. many cultures, depending on birth order, sibling of your parent, would you refer to that aunt as your older mother or younger father, that uncle. so thank you. i appreciate that. mr. pekoske, is that correct? mr. pekoske: pekoske. close. ms. harris: thank you. in march, 2014, t.s.a. released
a report in the aftermath of a shooting at l.a.x. where one t.s.a. officer was killed. and three others were wounded. in fact, i went there right after and it was a tragedy, as you can imagine, for all of us. the report was issued that recommended actions to enhance the presence of law enforcement and local law enforcement at checkpoints, including vs. -- including having t.s.a. officers. so in regards to that march, 2014, report, in contrast, the president's current budget proposes eliminating the law enforcement officer reimbursement grant program. which helps local law enforcement keep airports safe. what is your perspective on that recommendation as it relate to the budget? mr. pekoske: i was not involved in the build of the fiscal 2018 budget. if confirmed i'll get into the details right away. to understand the rationale for certain things that are in the budget, as additions and some that are subtractions.
i would reiterate that i think the partnership with state and local law enforcement is critical to t.s.a.'s mission. and the incident in los angeles in march of 2014 really ilvated -- illustrated the risks that t.s.a. officers and state and local officers face nearly every day. so that will be a very high priority for me and i will take a close look at that. ms. harris: i appreciate that. i would emphasize also that tragedy highlighted also the courage that t.s.a. officers display every day in the work that they do. they're readiness to actually -- their readiness to actually stand in the face of fire and protect civilians. another recommendation made in that 2014 report following the l.a.x. shooting was to, quote, extend the redeployment of additional, visible, intermodal and response teams. known as viper teams. that had been temporarily redeployed in the aftermath of that tragic incident. in the budget, there's a recommendation that the number of viper teams nationally be
reduced from 31 to eight. are you familiar with that recommendation? mr. pekoske: i am. ms. harris: can you tell me whether you support that? if so, why. mr. pekoske: what i can tell you is that i have worked with viper teams in my past. i have found them to be very effective as a deterrent. and i'm a strong supporter of he viper team effort. senator harris: if confirmed would you improve that recommendation and not reduce that number from 31 to eight? mr. glawe: i will look at the rationale of that number. i don't want the folks that operate on the viper teams to make sure they are -- to think they are underappreciated. mr. pekose: i'll reinforce that with them. senator harris: i want to talk about t.s.a. wait times which is something we all appreciate that folks -- it's frustrating
for folks who are trying to travel for a variety of reasons, for business, for family relationships, d.h.s. recently announced new screening rules which require additional screening for safety reasons. and there's no doubt that the security of all travelers is the highest priority. but we can also expect that these new rules will add to wait times or not? mr. pekose: senator, i would think they might slightly add to wait times but wait time is from what i understand something that's very carefully watched by t.s.a. across the entire enterprise. t.s.a. did a superb job last summer by redeploying assets from one airport to the other based on expected passenger throughput. the other thing i would mention to you, i think it's important to encourage more travelers to go into the trusted traveler programs because that should reduce their wait times. it increases, in my opinion,
security effectiveness. if confirmed, we could see what we could do to encourage global entry, lie t.s.a. precheck. senator harris: that would be great. in my state i have two of the largest airports. it is a concern for travelers. i hope senator lankford wasn't thinking of one of them when he was recalling frustrations he's had at airports across the country. i appreciate that. earlier in your testimony made a commitment to innovation and clearly have innovative ideas. thank you. i have nothing further. >> thank you, mr. chair and ranking member. thank you both for being here. i wanted to start with a question for you, mr. glawe. d.h.s. was created in part to make sure that all homeland security related functions of the government was housed under one roof. senator hassan: and in doing so
they created conditions by which homeland security-related information and intelligence was more effectively shared between each of the agencies. the d.h.s. office of intelligence and analysis was empowered to help facilitate this intelligence sharing between d.h.s. components. however, the undersecretaries that have come before you have encountered resistance from d.h.s. components in achieving full information and intelligence sharing within the broader d.h.s. as the former head of c.b.p.'s intelligence security office you had a front row seat between components in the d.h.s. office of intelligence and analysis. so what steps will you take to ensure that d.h.s. components are fully sharing with the d.h.s. office of intelligence and analysis? mr. glawe: senator, thank you for the question. thank you for meeting with me prior to my testimony today. i am uniquely postured to answer that question because i did lead the largest component in d.h.s., intelligence
enterprise, and couple things that my predecessor, if confirmed, would have undersecretary taylor developed a mission manager approach, integration approach of bringing the operational components, the intelligence apparatus under a collaboration-type environment, a business enterprise. i anticipate to facilitate and move forward with that model even further. there's a tremendous opportunity within the components intelligence functions, their data collection, their human source networks, their law enforcement collection on the aircraft they fly, the marine environment they collect on and partnership with the intelligence community partners of the admiral's prioritization within the coast guard. it will be a business model of integration. when i was with customs and border protection i did have that under a field intelligence fig model which i learned under the f.b.i. director clapper.
it will be a similar type model. i am not creating something new. i am tweaking what works with other organizations. it will be a big machine and heavy lift and look forward to partnering with the committee if confirmed on helping do that as a partnership. senator hassan: thank you very much. i appreciate the meeting with you in my office as well. and vice admiral, i wanted to touch with you a little bit on an issue that i know others have asked questions about already today which was about the morale in both of the agencies that you are nominated to lead, but i wanted to follow-up with you, vice admiral, because one of the questions that t.s.a. morale issue really begs is the way they're treated compared to other federal employees, right? so would you consider making t.s.a. employees full-fledge federal employees who enjoy all of the same benefits as all other civil servants do? mr. pekose: senator, thank you for the question it's good to see you again.
i'd like to get a feel for myself what the work force deals with. as i said in our office meeting several weeks ago, i intend to spend, if confirmed, a great deal of my time out in the field understanding this issue because i think it's critically important to address. i am looking to look at any option to address it. i think fundamentally the issue can be largely addressed through leadership at all levels of the organization and senator lankford mentioned that some airports have different levels of performance than others. well, that's something we measure and look at and try to drill down and try to figure out, why is that? is it a facility that might be hindering the job satisfaction of the employees? is it constraints on the facility, technology, or is it something else? that's something i want to pay an awful lot of attention and get to the root of. being at the very bottom of employee satisfaction is not where i want to be. from my coast guard experience
we are used to being at the very end. senator hassan: what i'd ask you to talk to t.s.a. employees, as i have, is the fact they are uniquely positioned as noncivil servants and it results in high turnover. it results in a lot of other issues that i think are fundamental to some of the morale issues. if you just would commit to talking to them about that and considering it, it would be very helpful. mr. pekoske: thank you. i want to understand that issue much better than i do today. senator hassan: one last question for you, again, mr. glawe, as the office in charge of analyzing the threat to homeland from isis and al qaeda-inspired terrorism, the d.h.s. office of intelligence and analysis plays an important role in helping to understand the recruitment propaganda, hat's intended to leverage homegrown terrorist attacks in the united states. given your experience as a local law enforcement officer, as f.b.i. counterterrorism agent and as an tenlt official,
what's the best way for the u.s. government to go about preventing the recruitment of our youngeople by these groups? mr. glawe: senator, thank you for the question. and i have thought about that oblem or that threat for years. and discussion with partnerships in the intelligence community, in law enforcement. at the very tip of the answer would be an integrated approach with law enforcement, the private sector, the communities at the lowest common denominator. i was a police officer when i started in houston almost 25 years ago. conversations with the community that are at risk. and developing those partnerships. it's not going to be solved by the law enforcement intelligence -- intelligence sector. what i saw as identifying violent acts or violent activity in communities is a
community-based approach. now, we have a challenge with the online caliphate and that's a whole different set of challenges as well is how do we create an infrastructure in protecting civil liberties and identifying those risks as well? it's a consolidated approach and communities to me in partnership with local law enforcement and local leadership is the key point. we've seen success in the somali communities in the u.s. close to 2010. if confirmed i look forward to working on that very tough problem. senator hassan: i thank you for that i want to follow-up very quickly a few weeks ago this committee heard testimony from the former director of the national counterterrorism center who spoke about the need for the u.s. government to embrace what i think you're describing an engagement strategy with communities across the country in order to prevent the possibility of homegrown terrorist attacks. i know i am out of time, but i'd like you to think about maybe we could follow-up what offices should be the tip of the spear for that particular effort. thank you. the chairman: senator carper.
senator carper: gentlemen, thank you very much. thanks for your service, years of service. mr. glawe, it's always nice to see you. have you had the opportunity to talk with general taylor and sort of looking back some of the initiatives that he launchedsful to completion and others that maybe not completed, not fully complemented, what are some things that he started under his watch that you think ought to be continued and improved upon? mr. glawe: senator, thank you for the question. i have met with all the prior undersecretaries, charlie taylor, karen wagner and frank taylor. i was fortunate -- senator carper: a lot of taylors. how did you slip in? mr. glawe: so secretary -- undersecretary taylor or general taylor had a couple tremendous programs that i hope if confirmed will continue with. he had an integrated intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance program where he was looking at the enterprise
of d.h.s. via u.s. customs and border protection, u.s. coast guard assets, specifically on the air and marine environment and how we can align our resources so we are not duplicating efforts. we're floating -- our float times are appropriate. then also looking at our data acquisition, how law enforcement data acquisition is required, how it's shared with our law enforcement and intelligence community and private sector partners. general taylor did an outstanding job of pushing that. i hope to if confirmed to continue on that. then also the mission manager approach where he had assigned functional mission managers to threat environments. the trade and travel space. also secretary nothing, improvements looking at the mission managers. again, general taylor was absolutely heading in the right path. i hope to continue down the paths that he started. senator carper: thank you. dmiral, nice to see you.
i was disappointed he did not continue in this administration and the leadership role and i hope someday he'll have the opportunity to serve in a senior role. i suspect you know him pretty well, that your time in the coast guard sort of overlapped that you've probably known him for a long time. i was very impressed with the leadership. i was impressed with the leadership he provided at t.s.a. i also say the leadership's most important ingredient in the organization i have ever seen or been part of and that includes t.s.a. i am one of the people when i go through airport security i thank the folks at t.s.a. for the work they do. i would encourage others who might be watching this today to do the same. i think they have a very, very difficult job and they need our thanks, especially when they do it well. i would like for you to answer as much as i asked david to answer questions looking at what admiral neffinger was
doing, attempting to do as the t.s.a. administrator for the last year or two that you think were especially promising. we talked to many about morale. a lot has been done in that regard. i don't know that you need to reinvent the wheel, but what are some things that you would want to carry on, some things you would want to improve upon and maybe some things you would do? to pekoske: he shared with me his blueprint for t.s. a i reviewed that and i could assure you i think he set the right foundation for t.s.a. and view my job as to build on the things he had done. he placed a lot of emphasis on the work force, including establishing a t.s.a. academy
so aneemployees came into the work force that they had a week or two period of time in georgia where they could be assembled into the organization and feel part -- senator carper: i've been there and seen the good work being done. mr. pekoske: i think it's very successful. he instituted training for the work force once they got back to their home airports. he started an innovation task force which i will shull continue and i will expand that task force because i think that's off on the right track. he made some organizational changes at the t.s.a. which are very important to reduce -- increase accountability. t.s.a. was able to move their resources around to be able to respond to predicted wait time surges at airports around the country. so all of those were very foundational and things i look to continue going forward. and rest assured that peter and i will have an ongoing dialogue over the course of time. we're very good friends and i have great respect for him.
senator carper: couple weeks ago my wife and i flew in and out of o'hare. we will be there this summer. recall a year ago the place was -- one of the things admiral neffinger was what caused that? should they have seen this tidal wave of passengers coming? and the answer was yes and what to do about it. he changed out the leadership. he changed it in a period of a couple of months. he changed it right away. i am very -- i was very impressed at the time about how important leadership is and he provided great leadership and also made sure folks at o'hare put the right leadership team in there and he pretty much did it like that. i want to ask you to talk to us a little bit about the partnership between the federal government and the airlines with respect to the work that t.s.a. does and it's very much a hand in glove operation.
particularly talk about technology and how we're maybe changing the way the experience that we have when we go through checks, security check-ins at airports, using technology. more throughput and a more secure way. mr. pekoske: if confirmed and i get out into the field, as i intend to do, i will make it a priority to visit the airline headquarters around the country and will choose those aports initial so i get that -- initially so i get that opportunity. i think it's critical to their success and to t.s.a. success and passenger experience and passenger safety and security. the airlines have helped a lot with technology insertion in airports around the country. there's screening lines now where he can put down your checked bag and don't have to wait for the person in front of you. several people can put it down at the same time. that fixes a known process problem in a security
checkpoint. additionally, the airlines have been very supportive of putting technology into checked bags. so that t.s.o. makes sense of everything we put into our checked baggage can do it with a little bit more confidence and little bit quicker. and so those are things that i would very much look forward to continuing and many of those were things peter had started with his relationship with the airlines. i look forward to a robust relationship with them. senator carper: thank you very much to both of you. the chairman: senator paul. senator paul: congratulations to both of you for your nominations. admiral pekoske, with regard to security in general and sort of the floss flee of security at our airports, for about a decade after 9/11, the bush administration opposed the frequent traveler program and they said, oh, everybody would be treated the same, it's universal risk. i always thought that was a mistake because you need to
spend time where there is more risk and less time where there is less risk and you can't possibly give the same level of scrutiny to all passengers. i like the approach you are talking about being in favor of the frequent flyer program as a way to spend more time on those who you know less about and perhaps at more risk. as you and i discussed, i think there is a question how much resources we spend on the random screening at the airport and how much we spend on looking at the risk of people before they get to the airport and what's your opinion on whether we're spending enough before they get to the airport versus when they get to the airport and the mix of that and whether we need to make any changes? mr. pekoske: senator, thanks for your question and your time yeerday. i haveot been briefed by t.s.a. in detail on the assified portions of those reviews. that's something i would pay a lot of attention to very early on if confirmed. as we discussed, and i said earlier today, putting more people into the trusted traveler programs is really, really important. i think it improves the
passenger experience and it makes the screening a lot more effective. like you just said, sir, it allows the resources that we have that are limited and airline travelers increasing at about 4% for year so we need to be mindful of that. so to the extent we can become more efficient but not suffer any loss of effectiveness in security as well. >> are you aware of the program for veterans that are amp tuesdays, the screenings for them? mr. pekoske: i don't know. mr. senator paul: i think we have a lot of veterans that are amputees and one of the things i'd like you to look at if you would is specifically look at this program and i would think there would be a pretty simple way it's pretty obvious if you're an amputee and if you present your military i.d. you don't have to take your prosthesis off. i have a friend who is a double amputee, it's a labor for him
and makes him less likely want to fly basically. mr. pekoske: sir, i agree and i don't think it's right. i'll take a look at it. senator paul: mr. glawe, one of the things that's really bothered us that cares about privacy now citizens are being detained at the border and denied entry back into their country unless they present a password to their phone. i understand the need for information but i also am a believer that you accuse somebody of something, you get a warrant from a judge and there's a process. do you think our current policy is consistent with what citizens should expect of the due process clause of the constitution, demanding their password -- denying them entry into their country? mr. glawe: senator, thank you for the question. and the policy decision on the border search has not fallen any of my position in my prior capacity. ith that being said, in 24, 25
years of law enforcement, the constitution is the bedrock of everything i've done in my career. the first amendment, fourth amendment specifically. and people being secure in their privacy is the utmost, and i will continue that in my career here as the intelligence -- if confirmed as the intelligence lead for d.h.s. and would adhere to any policies and procedures or precedents in any cases. senator paul: just be aware that are a significant portion of our country that is concerned about it. we have a bipartisan bill to say you need a warrant. i am not against you going after threats. i am not against you looking at a phone but you have to ask a judge first. i think the thing is people are alarmed at the fact -- people are already talking about, you can't take your phone abroad because you may not be allowed back in your country without searching your phone. and your phone -- what's on your phone and there are more extensive documents on your one that anyone ever had during the revolution.
it's not willy-nilly you can't go back into your country without looking at your phone. i don't know if they are downloading all of your contacts, all your search history, all your internet brousing. some of us are very, very concerned about this. i brought it up with general kelly. i don't think he shares significant concern with that and said the policy will continue but i can just let you know there's a significant amount of the public that's not happy about the idea that you could come back and i think there is the danger you come back in if you don't -- if you're not lily white and look like some sort of standard version of what you think is american that you are going to have your phone searched and that's kind of what it's looking like now. but if you have a risk associated with it, if you want to ask a judge, then by all means. i don't think we need to stop people coming back into the country and demanding look at their phones. senator mccaskill: thank you. i want to thank you, mr. pekoske. because you indicate in your policy questionnaire you would respond to any reasonable
request from members of congress regardless of party. mr. glawe, you did not receive the committee questionnaire so you have not had an opportunity to answer that question. would you also agree to commit to respond to any reasonable requests from any member of congress whether in the majority or the minority? mr. glawe: absolutely, senator. senator mccaskill: thank you. i want to talk a little bit about whistleblowers and retaliation, mr. pekoske. i think that's part of the problem that you're going to have to confront. let me go at it this way. there was information sent to most in the t.s.a.'s office of security capabilities and they were told recently that any and all documents related to an o.i.g. or g.a.o. request must be cleared by t.s.a. leadership before they can be sent to investigators. now, i want to give credit to the acting administrator because the acting administrator, once he realized this had gone out, immediately
corrected that and sent out guidance that concurred with the i.g.'s recommendation that, you know, they should not in fact do that and it was an all hands email to employees. so someone at t.s.a. thought it was appropriate to tell employees that any information given to the i.g. or g.a.o. had to be cleared. then once the acting person realized this, they corrected it. but i want to get to that person who issued that guidance in the first place. and the reason that i want to challenge you to find out who that was and to take action is because of the issue i've discovered on whistleblower retaliation. last year i asked the former administrator how many senior executives at t.s.a. had been found guilty of retaliation against whistleblowers by
inspector generals, the o.s.c. or federal court. he responded, and i quote, in the past five years, neither o.s.c. or any federal court has made a finding of whistleblower retaliation with respect to any senior executives at t.s.a. well, i was really surprised by that answer because i knew that o.s.c. had obtained corrective action for seven t.s.a. employees who claimed retaliation in 2015 alone. and that there had been 20 t.s.a. whistleblower claims in the last five years. so it didn't match up. what i was being told by the administrator and what we knew to be the reality in terms of whistleblower retaliation. and what we believe happened is that these cases got settled. and the managers who retaliating against their subordinates received no discipline. there was no action taken against them. there was no record that they had been disciplined for whistleblower retaliation even
though these cases had been settled under that rubric. so i think that's part of the problem here because what i think everybody that works there knows, they can retaliate blowing. ou for whistle i think somebody at t.s.a. sent out that email that you can't give anything to the i.g. or g.a.o. without telling the boss exhibit a that that culture is one of the reasons that people that work there have no confident in leadership. mr. glawe: senator, thank you. i will make that commitment to you. the whistleblower issue is one that concerns me greatly in t.s.a. it seems to me, and i have not been briefed on this in detail by the agency as a nominee, but it just seems to me that the whistleblower complaints are out of range. mr. pekoske: and it requires a senior level look. retaliating against whistleblowers is against the
law. it just can't be done. anybody that does that needs to be held accountable for doing so. that creates an absolute toxic environment in the work force and that's one of the things that i really think that is a key role of the administrator coming in is to try to fix that and try to get at it. so i will definitely do as you suggest. senator mccaskill: yeah. smearblely when no one is -- especially when no one is publicly disciplined. know based on your background , if our military or the coast guard operated that way, you talk about morale issues, there is a sense that if you screw up, something's going to happen. and it doesn't appear to me that at t.s.a. that has been the case and i really hope that you will. we'll follow-up with you after you are confirmed to work on this specific issue because i think it's very -- really important.
mr. pekoske: what i'll commit with you, one of the things i have is for o.s.c. to understand from their perspective what their issues are. they perform a very valuable function for the agency. u know, i appreciate a third party look -- senator mccaskill: aan auditor, that's good. we can do better. ends up at a much better place than telling people it doesn't work out. i want to talk about the viper program. you did talk about that. i want to ask you, glawe, you did mention the russian interference. bussed on what you know, do you have confidence that russians are going to continue to try to interfere in our elections next year and in 2020? mr. glawe: senator, thank you for the question. and i -- the russian intelligence services are an
aggressive intelligence service. not going into a classified response, i would anticipate of being an intelligence official for years looking at the state sponsored or foreign intelligence services that they are going to be an active and aggressive intelligence service for some time and we need to be postured as an intelligence enterprise to address not just russia but other, as senator tester brought up, in answering to his question was, there's many foreign intelligence organizations that are at risk to the united states and we need to be postured to address all those and identify them before they become a substantial issue. senator mccaskill: i guess based on your experience in the intelligence community, would you be comfortable partnering with russia and giving them access to any of our intelligence capabilities and any kind of task force? would you consider them a viable partner in terms of letting them into our systems
to somehow work together and a task force against cybersecurity, would you consider that a valuable idea? mr. glawe: senator, thank you for the question. my understanding is it was recently discussed at a senior executive level. what i would say with partnerships with foreign intelligence organizations, we'd have to have significant oversight and checks and balances to whatever agreements and partnerships we have. you know, maybe we have common -- common goals with terrorist organizations, things of that nature. but it would have to be a strict and regimented type of infrastructure build around any partnership with an intelligence organization. senator mccaskill: we just voted 98-2 to put more sanctions on russia and then somehow it might be a good idea for us to partner up? it was very confusing to me and finally, let me just say this, and thank you, mr. chairman,
for your indulgence. i want to thank you, mr. pekoske, i, as somebody who travels a lot. i call southwest my school bus coming back and forth to washington every week. i'm in airports a lot. and i got to tell you that i have seen a dramatic improvement in the t.s.a. personnel and their professionalism and the processes. and i think they have a really difficult job. and it's always going to be easy to call out a bad situation. and there are bad situations that will happen every day. we have a lot of people flying and people get frustrated and angry and nobody likes to wait in a line and i just think overall if i compare and contrast what i was going through six, seven years ago versus now, there has been dramatic improvements and i don't think we pause often enough to thank the men and women of t.s.a. for the very difficult job they're doing under very difficult circumstances. and i just wanted to end my
time at your confirmation hearing. you can carry that with you, there are people who really appreciate the good work they're doing. i do think the precheck lines are getting too long because more and more people are prechecked now. i now have like d.c.a. have to check because it's usually a lot quicker to go in the regular line than the precheck line. i think that's something you're going to have to deal with. all in all, i think there are very few bad experiences and a whole lot of professionalism going on. mr. pekoske: thank you for passing that along. that mirrors my experience as well. with respect to the work force, like you said, there are good things that happen every day we don't hear about them and the leadership at the airports needs to highlight the good performance of people when they perform exceptionally well. thank you for those comments. mr. chairman: my background is in manufacturing, continuous operation. millions of pounds of plastics are going by operators 24/7.
can be remonotonous. it was material for medical devices. we couldn't have any defects in that. you have a very similar process now with t.s.a. can be premonotonous. senator johnson: i think a big is where i d this do appreciate the continued improvement of admiral neffinger. also very impressed with the reaction last summer. that kind of flexible deployment. within the military -- i never served in the military -- the corps, the understanding of the finest among us of how critical their mission is even though they may be deployed in some pretty monotonous tasks as well, they understand what they're doing. that's something admiral neffinger, yourself continue to ring to this organization that culture, that describing to the members of the t.s.a. no matter what their position, they could save lives. it's just the mission is just so critical.
and so i have not been down the t.s.a. academy. i'd love to accompany you down there. i think that's a good starting point. we just got to be looking at that continuous improvement to instill in every member of the t.s.a. if we could shift them more and more to an overall culture that we already have instilled in the mine feinest among us, in the military, that would be a good step in the right direction. you talked about innovation. just like you talking a little bit, how do you actually implement innovation? i'll make a suggest from the standpoint of pilot programs. there are differences between airports. part of it might just be differences in the labor pool. obviously leadership makes a big difference, but i think metrics, measuring, incentivizing, empowering, management and then highlighting the best practices, can you just kind of speak to those concepts? mr. pekoske: thank you very much on your comments in the work force.
every person who worked at nasa puts a man on the moon. every person that works at t.s.a., we are not talking about small numbers. we are talking about almost 800 million people by air travel by air. that's not mentioning the surface transportation security work that t.s.a. does with partnerships. with respect to innovation, i look at innovation in sort of two ways. the first way is tk technological innovation and being able to insert technology rapidly. i 100% agree with you that prototyping is very important to do that. the key, though, is to make sure when you have a successful prototype you get it implemented. one of the things i've seen with innovation programs is they start off very strong. what the work force doesn't see, what they contribute to actually finding its way into the field, then the innovation program tends to wain a little bit. cycle time and being able to take a little bit of risk with respect to acquisition process i think is very important to be able to get that. senator johnson: that's
technological innovation. i am talking about work force innovation. i am talking about how you schedule the shifts, how you are you leave people, how often -- how long are they on the screens. how do you move people peem around. how are you flexible with your work force. i think from my standpoint is even more critical. mr. pekoske: yes, sir. that would be the second traunch is process innovation. when you're an individual who works a process day in and day out, five to seven days a week, you know where it can be improved. i think what t.s.a. needs to do and what i will do if confirmed is to put a process in place where the work force can put those recommendations up online. in the coast guard we had a virtual innovation forum where if you had a good idea, and these mostly came from our more junior members who were doing the job day in and day out, you posted on weab site, you put your name to it and then others could make comments on it. and so we really crowdsourced those ideas. then we took the best of them, the ones that got a lot of very positive votes, if you will, and implemented them and did
that rapidly. again, i think the cycle time is very important in -- from time that somebody comes up with a good idea and see it agreemented. it can't be two to three years. -- implemented. it can't be two to three years. senator johnson: you compare the military, may not be zero tolerance but people are held accountable in the military. i think that is oso important. it's one of the reasons you have the result in the military is in civilian federal work force, there's not that level of accountability. it's shocking the level of retaliation even though we have laws for years. we have the inspector general. and yet retaliation occurs unbelievably often. so i think that's got to be a top priority. i agree with senator mccaskill, we got to root it out. there has got to be no tolerance for it whatsoever. that will dramatically improve morale. in the administration if you
allow bad apples to continue to infect the organization that is exactly what ends up happening. mr. glawe, we had a hearing about a month or two ago on transnational criminal organizations. we focused on ms-13. with your background, local law enforcement, the priorities of this on the homeland security side of this security has been border security, cybersecurity, combating islamic terrorists and any other extreme violent actor. it has become so apparent -- i will say the primary root cause of our unsecured border is our insat yabble demand for drugs and that has led to the creation of the drug cartels, these transnational criminal organizations. as i traveled around wisconsin on a national security tour, talking to local, state, federal law enforcement, asked them what's the biggest problem you're dealing with, without exception it was drugs. the crime it creates, the broken families. speak a little bit about that as your priority in terms of
getting the intelligence and analyzing that so we can attack it effectively. mr. glawe: chairman johnson, thank you for the question. thank you for meeting with me too. i am extremely passionate about it. it strikes, i would argue, i'm sure our friends and family, everyone has been impacted by narcotics or substance abuse, addiction. it's eroding our communities. and the threats are emanating in foreign space. so we have an issue with our demand here that also has to have some tough policy decisions on how that's going to be addressed. but empowering our state and local partners and using the fusion centers to identify these threat vectors of how the cartels are moving their supply chain narcotics into our community, now they're using the dark web, encrypted communication. there are fortune 500, billion-dollar corporations with nexus to move people, resources. to postunit intelligence community, the private sector, the department of defense and law enforcement in a community
approach this is going to be critical. and i look forward to working with the committee. if there are stovepipes or policy or legal impediments, we are going to have to drive through them because this has become an epidemic problem in the united states. thank you for raising it and i look forward to further dialogue and conversations with the committee on how to address this. it will be a partnership at the lowest common denominator. the threat environment that's changing and adaptable all the time because the cartels are brilliant, sophisticated adversaries and it will take a brilliant, sophisticated network to defeat that adversary. senator johnson: one of the first thing i heard was when you see one fusion center you see one fusion center. it starts with leadership. when you talk about your mission, what will you focus on, how will you bring differentiated problem to the table, i can't think of a better initial than these transnational criminal organizations, drug organizations, the gangs. just a scourge on our society.
last one for you, vice admiral. i am a huge supporter of k-9 units and i think you'll find great deal of bipartisan support in congress for increasing the number of units we have. now they don't come cheap but as we have held hearings on this, there's no technology that can be at the nose -- beat the nose of a dog. in terms of explosive and smaller devices, i think it's critical. so i guess -- i definitely want to work with you to do everything we can to find the resources. i'm just looking for a commitment to k-9 units. mr. pekoske: i am also a huge fan with k-9 units. i have experience working with them in my coast guard background. they are superb detecting and superb at deterring behavior. so you have my commitment to take a very close look at that. i think it's one of the ways we can improve the effectiveness with security. senator johnson: i like this committee, first all, the
members attend. they ask excellent questions. we let our colleagues ask the questions. i've come to run out of them. let me just say that i mentioned the community. the fifth i didn't mention was the fact we are committed to making sure the secretary, undersecretaries, everybody in this function of trying to keep our homeland safe, secure, that you succeed in your mission. so we are dedicated to doing that. let me just say, let us -- help us help you. you got to communicate with us. we want to do everything we can to support your mission because it's just so critical. so, again, i want to thank you for your past service, for your willingness to serve again. thank your family members. you will see them less because these are such important jobs. we're just so appreciative you are willing to serve your nation once again in these important capacities. vice admiral pekoske has made financial disclosures and bigraphical and prehearing questions submitted by the committee. without objection, this information will be made part
of the record, hearing record. with exception to the financial data. i also want to make sure without objection senator harris' questions can also be entered in the record. hearing no objection, so ordered. the hearing record will remain open until noon tomorrow, july 12, for submissions for the record. this hearing is adjourned. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]